- Jurisdiction
- New York
Background:
1. Public School teaching applications require three letters of reference in the past three years, meaning that the importance of obtaining one per year cannot be overstated for professional educators working as substitutes while seeking full-time positions.
2. In the politically sensitive and workload intensive (e.g.: curriculum, discipline, union, scheduling, operations, policy, athletics, evaluations) life of a school administrator, any real or fabricated complaint of an at-will employee justifies their immediate dismissal.
COMPLAINT:
I began working for the Honeoye Falls - Lima School District high school as an at-will substitute employee in the 2015-16 school year. By the end of my first week, student feedback was inordinately complementary and teachers were requesting me. At the beginning of the 2016-17 school year, I discovered I had been dismissed from the high school and was only eligible to work at the middle school, because of a complaint from a teacher. After about a month of building a reputation, I asked the middle school Principal for an observation. He refused, citing that as a physics teacher, I needed to create and present a high school physics lesson for an appropriate observation and letter of reference. He advised me to simply request reinstatement from the District Human Resources Director.
I obtained a meeting with the HR Director, who had no objections to my reinstatement at the high school. She informed me that I only needed approval from the HS Principal.
I met with the HS Principal, who gave his approval for my return to the high school. He informed me that I needed to briefly meet with the HR Director again to finalize it.
From this point onward, the HR Director was busy, cancelled, put me off, or otherwise was unable to meet with me, although I would typically visit the HR Director's Office every day after work hoping to obtain this brief meeting. This continued for the remainder of the school year.
At the beginning of the 2017-18 school year, after substituting at the middle school and visiting the HR Director, she met with me and informed me that I would not be permitted to return to the high school.
Although I had requested it, at no time was any observation or evaluation done regarding my performance to justify such a delayed decision or reconsideration.
My contention is that Public Sector managers/administrators are not permitted by law to mislead and lie to their employees to secure their services (for an entire year!), especially when the impact of their actions is detrimental to the career of the employee. There must be some obligation to inform the employee of their decision in a timely manner. Because the school district utilized my services for more than an entire school year, most of which was under the false pretense of reinstatment, (I would have immediately stopped working at that district were I not permitted to return to the high school), it appears obvious that because no observation or report on me led to the reconsideration of where I could work- the decision was made long before it was communicated to me, and withheld to procure my continued services. Additionally, the Middle School Principal informed me that neither the HS Principal nor the HR Director had asked about my performance during the 2017-18 school year, or at all during the 2016-17 school year, further indicating the decision had been made prior and withheld from me.
There is no provable compensatory damage, although it should be noted that substitute teacher pay is less than the poverty line minimum for my family. My damages are in the opportunity cost of wasting time at this district instead of building relationships at other districts in preparation for the seasonal hiring cycle, automotive depreciation from the inordinately long drive to that district, and in the loss of an entire year working without the opportunity to obtain another critical letter of reference.
PLEASE ADVISE OR HELP!
XXX-XXX-XXXX
Eric
1. Public School teaching applications require three letters of reference in the past three years, meaning that the importance of obtaining one per year cannot be overstated for professional educators working as substitutes while seeking full-time positions.
2. In the politically sensitive and workload intensive (e.g.: curriculum, discipline, union, scheduling, operations, policy, athletics, evaluations) life of a school administrator, any real or fabricated complaint of an at-will employee justifies their immediate dismissal.
COMPLAINT:
I began working for the Honeoye Falls - Lima School District high school as an at-will substitute employee in the 2015-16 school year. By the end of my first week, student feedback was inordinately complementary and teachers were requesting me. At the beginning of the 2016-17 school year, I discovered I had been dismissed from the high school and was only eligible to work at the middle school, because of a complaint from a teacher. After about a month of building a reputation, I asked the middle school Principal for an observation. He refused, citing that as a physics teacher, I needed to create and present a high school physics lesson for an appropriate observation and letter of reference. He advised me to simply request reinstatement from the District Human Resources Director.
I obtained a meeting with the HR Director, who had no objections to my reinstatement at the high school. She informed me that I only needed approval from the HS Principal.
I met with the HS Principal, who gave his approval for my return to the high school. He informed me that I needed to briefly meet with the HR Director again to finalize it.
From this point onward, the HR Director was busy, cancelled, put me off, or otherwise was unable to meet with me, although I would typically visit the HR Director's Office every day after work hoping to obtain this brief meeting. This continued for the remainder of the school year.
At the beginning of the 2017-18 school year, after substituting at the middle school and visiting the HR Director, she met with me and informed me that I would not be permitted to return to the high school.
Although I had requested it, at no time was any observation or evaluation done regarding my performance to justify such a delayed decision or reconsideration.
My contention is that Public Sector managers/administrators are not permitted by law to mislead and lie to their employees to secure their services (for an entire year!), especially when the impact of their actions is detrimental to the career of the employee. There must be some obligation to inform the employee of their decision in a timely manner. Because the school district utilized my services for more than an entire school year, most of which was under the false pretense of reinstatment, (I would have immediately stopped working at that district were I not permitted to return to the high school), it appears obvious that because no observation or report on me led to the reconsideration of where I could work- the decision was made long before it was communicated to me, and withheld to procure my continued services. Additionally, the Middle School Principal informed me that neither the HS Principal nor the HR Director had asked about my performance during the 2017-18 school year, or at all during the 2016-17 school year, further indicating the decision had been made prior and withheld from me.
There is no provable compensatory damage, although it should be noted that substitute teacher pay is less than the poverty line minimum for my family. My damages are in the opportunity cost of wasting time at this district instead of building relationships at other districts in preparation for the seasonal hiring cycle, automotive depreciation from the inordinately long drive to that district, and in the loss of an entire year working without the opportunity to obtain another critical letter of reference.
PLEASE ADVISE OR HELP!
XXX-XXX-XXXX
Eric
